Attachment_J.29_-_Offeror_Question_and_Answers.pdf

Answers to Offeror Questions dated 05 Jan 2018 Attachment J.29

Question Number

Discussion Question Response

1 Section L.7(A) states the following: “Third Column – one fixed hourly burdened rate for each individually listed labor category to cover the timeframe of 26 April 2017 through 25 April 2018.”

Since 25 April 2017 has already passed could the Government please clarify the Period of Performance (PoP)?

This was a typo and is corrected via Amendment A0006.

2 Section L.7(A) also states: “Task Order 0001 pricing for CLINs 0001 and 0002 shall be inclusive of the Task Order 0001 period of performance dates specified in paragraph L5 (26 April 2018 – 28 February 2019), however per Section F – Deliveries or Performance of the conformed RFP indicates the PoP to be 26 April 2018 – 25 April 2019.

Could the Government please clarify?

Section F provides the ordering period. Therefore, the Government could issue one or more task orders during the period of 26 April 2018 – 25 April 2019. The first task order period of performance does not have to coincide with the Section F ordering period. Therefore, the first task order period of performance remains as 26 April 2018 – 28 February 2019.

3 It appears that not all questions from industry regarding this solicitation have been answered.

Could the Government provide a timeframe on when additional information regarding industry questions can be expected and whether an extension in the due date for proposal submittals is anticipated?

The Government timely posted responses to Q&A questions received at the email address specified in the updated solicitation Amendment A0002. The Government recently became aware of a set of industry questions sent to an incorrect email address that identified an issue with cost calculation that justifies an extension of the proposal due date. Offerors are cautioned to read the solicitation and all amendments carefully and strictly comply with all requirements listed therein. The Government is extending the proposal due date via Amendment A0006.

4 We believe the government's instructions for total cost calculation on page 46 of the RFP (Section L.7, Volume III) will result in an inaccurate calculation. Per the RFP, the offeror shall propose one overall price for the first task order indicated in the Tenth column. The total price is a summation that provides the overall price per labor category by:

• First multiplying the second column (hours) by 7 (i.e., seven years)

• Then, summing up the rates per row from the third column to ninth column

• Finally, multiplying the product of the first bullet by the total sum of the second bullet We believe the second column (hours) should not be multiplied by 7, because applying subsequent instructions to this number yields a value that is not commensurate with the values we otherwise estimated.

Can the Government provide clarification into these pricing instructions?

This was a typo and corrected via Amendment A0006.

Since the first task order has a period of performance of ten months, the factor of 7 was increased to 8.4, to account for the full 84 month ordering period.

5 In RFP Section G.4 (pages 1617), the Government will “withhold” specific dollar values if the contractor fails to hold a scheduled course or allows the contractor’s cybersecurity certificate to lapse.

The FAR provides for withholding of various amounts in certain cases such as “Payments Under Time and Materials and Labor Hour Contracts” (FAR 52.2327); “Payments Under Fixed Price Construction Contracts” (FAR 52.2325); or on Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract (FAR 52.2617)where the fee portion is withheld pending audit, or in the case where Progress Payments have been authorized (FAR 52.3235).

Under those circumstances, a “withholding” is imposed to ensure contractor compliance with some contract deliverable, and provides the contractor with a means to recapture the withheld amounts. In the current solicitation, the anticipated award is a Firm Fixed Price contract with no set dollar value associated with each course, and no stated CLINS for individual courses. For

If the withholding does apply, under section G.4 there is no provision for the contractor to recover the withheld amounts for failure to meet specifications. The “withholding” appears to be a flat fee penalty that does not have any provision for the repayment of the held back amount to the contractor. What if the contractor remedies the issue that would have resulted in a withholding, for example, the contractor holds the course later in the contract period of performance? Can the contractor recover these costs? Would the Government provide clarification or additional language detailing a mechanism by which the contractor can recoup these withheld costs?

The withholding (deduction) is a means to address the contractor’s inadequate performance of the contract, and the Government has specified the amount for certain failures of performance. The Government has the right to withhold (deduct) payment pursuant to FAR 52.232-1.

Because the performance issues that cause the withholdings (deductions) to occur are material terms of the contract (failure to hold a course on time, for example), there is no way for the contractor to re-perform in accordance with the term of the contract.

Moreover, pursuant to the exception in FAR 52.232-9(d), the limitation on withholding of payments is inappropriate. Should such a situation arise, the Government will execute a modification, providing a downward price adjustment, in accordance with the table set forth in Section G. Accordingly, such withholdings (deductions) are not recoverable by the contractor.

this reason, it would appear that we do not fall under the withholding scenarios specified by the FAR. Is this correct? If so, can we remove this language from the RFP?